by Theodore Dalrymple
Compared with reading a book by Professor Habermas, going
to the dentist is a pleasant experience. He has made his career as a torturer –
not of people, but of language. The esteem in which he is widely held is to me
mysterious and itself of sociological and psychological interest, worthy of
further research. Audiences have been known almost to swoon at his Teutonically
polysyllabic vaticinations. He is largely incomprehensible; where he is
comprehensible, he is either banal or wrong, or both. He is often funny, but
not intentionally.
Let us take his banality first. At the bottom of page
69 of this short but frivolously dense book entitled THE CRISIS OF THE EUROPEAN UNION: A Response , we read with respect to his scheme for a world
body that will deliver universal justice (modeled more or less on the
triumphantly successful European Union):
“But any design for a world order aiming at civilizing the exercise of political authority, no matter how farsighted it might be, must take account of the fact that the historical asynchronicity of regional developments and the corresponding socio-economic disparities between the multiple modernities cannot be erased overnight.”
Do we really need a professor of philosophy –
indeed, do we need anyone – to tell us this? Professor Habermas tries to
squeeze significance out of truisms, as a constipated man tries to squeeze
stools out of a reluctant colon, by the use of locutions such as ‘multiple modernities’
and the printing of the word ‘overnight’ in italics. But is there a single
person in the world who thinks that all economic differences between
individuals and nations could be ironed out overnight, and who either needs to
or would be disabused of this notion by Professor Habermas’s contradiction of
it? Academic vacuity can go no further.